4.7 Article

Environmental impact of Recover cotton in textile industry

Journal

RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING
Volume 116, Issue -, Pages 107-115

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.09.034

Keywords

Life cycle assessment; Cotton; Recover; Upcycled textile system; Organic; Conventional; Recycled

Funding

  1. Generalitat Valenciana (Valencia, Spain) [2014-077]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparative evaluation of the life cycle assessment (LCA) of Recover cotton, obtained from recycled garments, and virgin one, cultivated from traditional and organic crops, has been made based on the quantification of environmental impact categories, such as abiotic depletion, global warming, water use, acidification and eutrophication potential. LCA data reported in the literature for the steps of cultivation, ginning/cutting, and dyeing were compared in order to clearly show the environmental advantages of moving from traditional practices, to organic cultivation and the use of Recover cotton, a novel procedure that involves the production of cotton yarns from coloured and well characterized recycled materials. Studies made evidenced that the use of organic cotton cultivation avoids the use of pesticides and chemicals, reducing environmental impacts, but maintaining those related to ginning and dyeing steps. However, the use of Recover cotton avoids the impact of both, cotton cultivation and dyeing steps, based on an appropriate selection of raw materials obtained from textile wastes, being only increased the energy costs of cutting/shredding processes as compared to ginning ones. In short, it can be concluded that the use of Recover cotton for the production of high quality textiles involves an added value of the products from an environmental point of view, being costs and electrical consumes also reduced and providing a second life for produced textiles. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available